Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) excess mortality outcomes associated with pandemic effects study (COPES): A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background and aim: With the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continuing to impact healthcare systems around the world, healthcare providers are attempting to balance resources devoted to COVID-19 patients while minimizing excess mortality overall (both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients). To this end, we conducted a systematic review (SR) to describe the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on all-cause excess mortality (COVID-19 and non-COVID-19) during the pandemic timeframe compared to non-pandemic times. Methods: We searched EMBASE, Cochrane Database of SRs, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL), from inception (1948) to December 31, 2020. We used a two-stage review process to screen/extract data. We assessed risk of bias using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). We used Critical Appraisal and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Of 11,581 citations, 194 studies met eligibility. Of these studies, 31 had mortality comparisons (n = 433,196,345 participants). Compared to pre-pandemic times, during the COVID-19 pandemic, our meta-analysis demonstrated that COVID-19 mortality had an increased risk difference (RD) of 0.06% (95% CI: 0.06-0.06% p < 0.00001). All-cause mortality also increased [relative risk (RR): 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.38-1.70, p < 0.00001] alongside non-COVID-19 mortality (RR: 1.18, 1.07-1.30, p < 0.00001). There was "very low" certainty of evidence through GRADE assessment for all outcomes studied, demonstrating the evidence as uncertain. Interpretation: The COVID-19 pandemic may have caused significant increases in all-cause excess mortality, greater than those accounted for by increases due to COVID-19 mortality alone, although the evidence is uncertain. Systematic review registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails], identifier [CRD42020201256].

Non-COVID outcomes associated with the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic effects study (COPES): A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: As the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues, healthcare providers struggle to manage both COVID-19 and non-COVID patients while still providing high-quality care. We conducted a systematic review/meta-analysis to describe the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with non-COVID illness and on healthcare systems compared to non-pandemic epochs. METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE/EMBASE/Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/CENTRAL/CINAHL (inception to December 31, 2020). All study types with COVID-pandemic time period (after December 31, 2019) with comparative non-pandemic time periods (prior to December 31, 2019). Data regarding study characteristics/case-mix/interventions/comparators/ outcomes (primary: mortality; secondary: morbidity/hospitalizations/disruptions-to-care. Paired reviewers conducted screening and abstraction, with conflicts resolved by discussion. Effect sizes for specific therapies were pooled using random-effects models. Risk of bias was assessed by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, with evidence rating using GRADE methodology. RESULTS: Of 11,581 citations, 167 studies met eligibility. Our meta-analysis showed an increased mortality of 16% during the COVID pandemic for non-COVID illness compared with 11% mortality during the pre-pandemic period (RR 1.38, 95% CI: 1.28-1.50; absolute risk difference: 5% [95% CI: 4-6%], p<0.00001, very low certainty evidence). Twenty-eight studies (17%) reported significant changes in morbidity (where 93% reported increases), while 30 studies (18%) reported no significant change (very low certainty). Thirty-nine studies (23%) reported significant changes in hospitalizations (97% reporting decreases), while 111 studies (66%) reported no significant change (very low certainty). Sixty-two studies (37%) reported significant disruptions in standards-to-care (73% reporting increases), while 62 studies (37%) reported no significant change (very low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant increase in mortality during the COVID pandemic compared to pre-pandemic times for non-COVID illnesses. When significant changes were reported, there was increased morbidity, decreased hospitalizations and increased disruptions in standards-of-care. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020201256 (Sept 2, 2020).

Defining COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary aspergillosis may complicate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and contribute to excess mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The disease is poorly understood, in part due to discordant definitions across studies. OBJECTIVES: We sought to review the prevalence, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) and compare research definitions. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and MedRxiv were searched from inception to October 12, 2021. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: ICU cohort studies and CAPA case series including ≥3 patients were included. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients in ICUs with COVID-19. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were reclassified according to four research definitions. We assessed risk of bias with an adaptation of the Joanna Briggs Institute cohort checklist tool for systematic reviews. METHODS: We calculated CAPA prevalence using the Freeman-Tukey random effects method. Correlations between definitions were assessed with Spearman's rank test. Associations between antifungals and outcome were assessed with random effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-one studies were included. Among 3297 COVID-19 patients in ICU cohort studies, 313 were diagnosed with CAPA (prevalence 10%; 95% CI 8%-13%). Two hundred seventy-seven patients had patient-level data allowing reclassification. Definitions had limited correlation with one another (ρ = 0.268-0.447; p < 0.001), with the exception of Koehler and Verweij (ρ = 0.893; p < 0.001); 33.9% of patients reported to have CAPA did not fulfill any research definitions. Patients were diagnosed after a median of 8 days (interquartile range 5-14) in ICUs. Tracheobronchitis occurred in 3% of patients examined with bronchoscopy. The mortality rate was high (59.2%). Applying CAPA research definitions did not strengthen the association between mould-active antifungals and survival. CONCLUSIONS: The reported prevalence of CAPA is significant but may be exaggerated by nonstandard definitions.

Invasive mould disease in fatal COVID-19: a systematic review of autopsies.

Invasive mould disease (IMD) might affect up to a third of critically ill patients with COVID-19. COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) is typically diagnosed on the basis of a combination of non-specific clinical, radiographical, and mycological findings, but whether most cases represent invasive disease is unresolved. We systematically reviewed autopsy series of three or more decedents with COVID-19 for evidence of IMD. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, OVID (Embase), and medRxiv for studies in English or French published from Jan 1, 2019, to Sept 26, 2020. We identified 1070 references, of which 50 studies met the criteria. These studies described autopsies from 677 decedents, with individual-level data for 443 decedents. The median age was 70·0 years (IQR 57·0-79·0). Of decedents with individual-level data, 133 (30%) had diabetes, 97 (22%) had pre-existing lung disease, and 27 (6%) had immunocompromising conditions. Of 548 decedents with such data, 320 (58%) received invasive mechanical ventilation; among 140 decedents for whom this was known, ventilation was for a median of 9·0 days (IQR 5·0-20·0). Treatment included immunomodulation in 60 decedents and antifungals in 50 decedents. Autopsy-proven IMD occurred in 11 (2%) of 677 decedents, including eight CAPA, two unspecified IMD, and one disseminated mucormycosis. Among 320 decedents who received mechanical ventilation, six (2%) had IMD. We conclude that IMD, including CAPA, is an uncommon autopsy finding in COVID-19.

Bacterial Superinfections Among Persons With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Comprehensive Review of Data From Postmortem Studies.

BACKGROUND: Limited clinical data suggest a ~16% prevalence of bacterial superinfections among critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We reviewed postmortem studies of patients with COVID-19 published in English through September 26, 2020, for histopathologic findings consistent with bacterial lung infections. RESULTS: Worldwide, 621 patients from 75 studies were included. The quality of data was uneven, likely because identifying superinfections was not a major objective in 96% (72/75) of studies. Histopathology consistent with a potential lung superinfection was reported in 32% (200/621) of patients (22-96 years old; 66% men). Types of infections were pneumonia (95%), abscesses or empyema (3.5%), and septic emboli (1.5%). Seventy-three percent of pneumonias were focal rather than diffuse. The predominant histopathologic findings were intra-alveolar neutrophilic infiltrations that were distinct from those typical of COVID-19-associated diffuse alveolar damage. In studies with available data, 79% of patients received antimicrobial treatment; the most common agents were beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitors (48%), macrolides (16%), cephalosoprins (12%), and carbapenems (6%). Superinfections were proven by direct visualization or recovery of bacteria in 25.5% (51/200) of potential cases and 8% of all patients in postmortem studies. In rank order, pathogens included Acinetobacter baumannii, Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Lung superinfections were the cause of death in 16% of potential cases and 3% of all patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Potential bacterial lung superinfections were evident at postmortem examination in 32% of persons who died with COVID-19 (proven, 8%; possible, 24%), but they were uncommonly the cause of death.